Survival of ART restorations assessed using selected FDI and modified ART restoration criteria

Abeer Farag, Wil J M van der Sanden, Hisran Abdelwahab, Jo E Frencken, Abeer Farag, Wil J M van der Sanden, Hisran Abdelwahab, Jo E Frencken

Abstract

A new set of criteria for assessing the quality of restorations using modern restorative materials, named FDI criteria, was recently introduced. This study tested the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference in survival estimate percentages of ART restorations assessed using selected FDI and modified ART criteria after 1 and 5 years. One operator placed a total of 60 class I and 30 Class II high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations in ninety 14- to 15-year-olds. Two calibrated and independent evaluators using both criteria evaluated restorations on diestone replicas at baseline and after 1 and 5 years. Statistical analyses were done using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. The survival results of ART restorations assessed using both sets of criteria after 1 and 5 years (p = 0.27) did not differ significantly. Three ART restorations were assessed as failures according to the ART criteria, while they were assessed as survived using the FDI criteria. We conclude that the modified ART criteria enable reliable assessment of ART restorations in permanent teeth from diestone replicas and that there was no significant difference in survival estimates of ART restorations assessed using both sets of criteria. The null hypothesis was accepted.

References

    1. Hickel R, Roulet JF, Bayne S, Heintze SD, Mjör IA, Peters M, Rousson V, Randall R, Schmalz G, Tyas M, Vanherle G. Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials. Clin Oral Invest. 2007;11:5–33. doi: 10.1007/s00784-006-0095-7.
    1. Frencken JE, Pilot T, Songpaisan Y, Phantumvanit P. Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART): rationale, technique and development. J Public Health Dent. 1996;56:135–140. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1996.tb02423.x.
    1. Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD. ART restorations and glass ionomer sealants in Zimbabwe: survival after 3 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998;26:372–381. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1998.tb01975.x.
    1. Smales RJ, Gao W, Ho FT. In vitro evaluation of sealing pits and fissures with newer glass ionomer cements developed for the ART technique. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 1997;21:321–323.
    1. Hof MA Van ’t, Frencken JE, van Palenstein Helderman WH, Holmgren CJ. The ART approach for managing dental caries: a meta-analysis. Int Dent J. 2006;56:345–351. doi: 10.1111/j.1875-595X.2006.tb00339.x.
    1. Holmgren CJ, Lo ECM, Hu DY, Wan HC. ART restorations and sealants placed in Chinese school children—result after three years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2000;28:314–320. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0528.2000.280410.x.
    1. Lo ECM, Luo Y, Fan MW, Wei SHY. Clinical Investigation of two glass ionomer restoratives used with atraumatic restorative treatment approach in china: two years results. Caries Res. 2001;35:458–463. doi: 10.1159/000047490.
    1. Farag A, van der Sanden WJM, Abdelwahab H, Mulder J, Frencken JE. 5-Year survival of ART restorations with and without cavity disinfection. J Dent. 2009;37:468–474. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2009.03.002.
    1. Graig RG, Powers JM. Restorative dental materials. 11. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002. p. 397.
    1. Ismail AI, Sohn W, Tellez M, Amaya A, Sen A, Hasson H, Pitts NB. The international caries detection and assessment system (ICDAS): an integrated system for measuring dental caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007;35:170–178. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00347.x.
    1. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–174. doi: 10.2307/2529310.
    1. Frencken JE, Wolke J. Clinical and SEM assessment of ART high-viscosity glass-ionomer sealants after 8–13 years in 4 teeth. J Dent. 2010;38:59–64. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2009.09.004.
    1. Ryge G. Clinical criteria. Int Dent J. 1980;30:347–358.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe